4 ms·

I think you completely misinterpret the situation with Russia and China. Russia and China have the objectives of their own. For Russia it is to expand their em

by genman 3y ago

I think you completely misinterpret the situation with Russia and China. Russia and China have the objectives of their own. For Russia it is to expand their empire that in their own mind rightfully belongs to them. They didn't attack Ukraine because of US actions but because they seriously believe that they have some kind of right over Ukrainians lands, or even more seriously, that Ukrainians don't exists. If US would have been in Ukraine, or moved in rapidly when the situation became dangerous, there wouldn't be war at them moment. We see this clearly play out in far east, where China has ambition to overtake Taiwan (what they like Russia with Ukraine believe to belong rightfully to themselves). They clearly would have already attacked if it wasn't clear that US will prevent them doing so. I'm certain that they would have done it, had US backed away from Ukraine. I'm also certain that what led Russia to believe that they could pull off Ukrainian invasion, was the US departure from Afghanistan, not that they did it but how they did it by letting Taliban completely humiliate them without any response. Russia believed that US is weak, not interested, and it would possibly have been like that, had Ukraine not managed to pull off very strong response. US is there to fill the vacuum. If it was not US, it would be China (or it could Russia possibly). If not today, then eventually it would be one of them. I prefer US because it is more predictable and rule based and in the long run more favorable for the people.

Matl 3y ago
There are many, many explanations for i.e. why didn't China attack Taiwan (yet) and while the U.S. finger in the region helps in some ways, supporting Taiwan proclaiming independence for example may actually not be helping to prevent war there. It seems to me like China is much more reluctant than Russia is to go to such a war, probably because apart from facing domestic nationalistic pressure to do so, there's little actual reason and China does not really want to have its (in Chinese memory) recent expansion of the middle class stopped by facing isolation. Even the Chinese government responds to popular pressure by simply adjusting its policy more often than deploying tanks. With regards to Russia, Putin, (being a Russian neocon), is using the example of how Russians are sometimes treated in former Soviet countries with regards to citizenship, speaking Russian etc., as well as Ukraine say banning Russian language books or the Russian flag being banned at sports events, which actually helps his cause domestically. If we were actually interested in weakening his grip, we'd strongly oppose such policies imo.
- lobocinza 3y ago
  Chinese are extremely risk averse. They will eventually invade Taiwan but only when the odds are extremely in their favor. The Russian invasion of Ukraine showed them that they need to prepare better. I wouldn't be surprised if their economy collapses/stagnates before this day even comes.
  - Matl 3y ago
    > I wouldn't be surprised if their economy collapses/stagnates before this day even comes. As predicted every year for the past 15 years.
- genman 3y ago
  And from where does this isolation come from? I think you are contradicting a little with yourself here.
  - Matl 3y ago
    It comes from it attacking Taiwan unprovoked, but there's no need for large U.S. presence for that to already not be attractive as it would be a huge blow for China in the economic realm and even include the Global South. On the other hand, Taiwan declaring independence on U.S. encouragement for example could be spun by China as protecting its stated red lines and acting out despite U.S. presence in the region. You may not know this, but Russia enjoys some sympathy in the Global South because they see the situation as being at least partly provoked by the U.S. The same could happen over Taiwan, but it doesn't have to if cooler heads prevail.
    - genman 3y ago
      Not from "what" but from "where" is the question. If there was no Western opposition to the attack, there wouldn't be no isolation. The fact that Russia has received some sympathy shows how important is to express the situation correctly - Russia was not provoked by anything. They would have attacked either way because they consider these lands theirs and the people who live there at best as nothing. The thinking goes - those countries they attack will greet them as liberators or they are the worst enemies that must be eliminated (e.g. Nazis). Now I can understand that some countries have strong anti-US sentiment, but reason for the whole war has a very little to do with US despite Russia's huge effort to make it appear to be the cause.
brabel 3y ago
No, you're misrepresenting it. Your rationale is that Russia is an evil empire trying to expand its borders to its former glory, and that's why it attacked Ukraine... a primary school level of simplification. You ignore that Russia's number one fear after the collapse of the USSR was for another military invasion from the West, as had happened several times over the last few centuries... that Russia's border with Ukraine is its most "porous" border, easy to cross for whatever purpose, including a military invasion... that NATO's whole purpose since it was founded has always been to counter Russia, so the Russian's fears that NATO is an enemy are absolutely correct... that Ukraine's Euromaidan revolution caused Ukraine to go from a neutral country (or a buffer country as most people call it) to being actively hostile against Russia, which was the trigger for the Crimean invasion in 2014... that the US and UK, as guarantors of the Budapest Agreement with Russian and Ukraine, should have immediately intervened to defend Ukraine when that happened, but did absolutely nothing, giving Russia confirmation that it would be able to keep Ukraine out of NATO by force, which is really what it is trying to do currently... and finally, that every country has its motivations to do the things it does, a lot more complex and subtle than "being evil and wanting more land", and perhaps trying to understand what those motivations are, why their culture has evolved the way it has and how it is likely to react to your actions, would go a very long way to avoiding stupid conflicts like this. But yeah, it's so much easier to keep parroting the news and thinking of the whole story as a black-and-white, villain VS hero story.
- lisasays 3y ago
  Your rationale is that Russia is an evil empire trying to expand its borders to its former glory, and that's why it attacked Ukraine... a primary school level of simplification. Disagree. Replace "evil empire" with "Old-school imperialist power" and you have a 90 percent approximation to the essential truth about that country (or its current leadership, in any case). For all its banality. Though "evil" of course is not a misplaced word to use either, in regard to its actions.
- HellDunkel 3y ago
  You could have made your point without accusing anyone of parroting „the media“. Russia has agreed to the borders of Ukraine in 1993 and from then on 2 more times. They have onesidedly broken the agreement and attacked a peaceful neighbour, no commitment to not joining NATO has been granted. These are facts you can easily look up, no need to come up with made up security concerns which have been no problem a decade earlier.

by genman 3y ago

Matl 3y ago

There are many, many explanations for i.e. why didn't China attack Taiwan (yet) and while the U.S. finger in the region helps in some ways, supporting Taiwan proclaiming independence for example may actually not be helping to prevent war there. It seems to me like China is much more reluctant than Russia is to go to such a war, probably because apart from facing domestic nationalistic pressure to do so, there's little actual reason and China does not really want to have its (in Chinese memory) recent expansion of the middle class stopped by facing isolation. Even the Chinese government responds to popular pressure by simply adjusting its policy more often than deploying tanks. With regards to Russia, Putin, (being a Russian neocon), is using the example of how Russians are sometimes treated in former Soviet countries with regards to citizenship, speaking Russian etc., as well as Ukraine say banning Russian language books or the Russian flag being banned at sports events, which actually helps his cause domestically. If we were actually interested in weakening his grip, we'd strongly oppose such policies imo.

lobocinza 3y ago
Chinese are extremely risk averse. They will eventually invade Taiwan but only when the odds are extremely in their favor. The Russian invasion of Ukraine showed them that they need to prepare better. I wouldn't be surprised if their economy collapses/stagnates before this day even comes.
- Matl 3y ago
  > I wouldn't be surprised if their economy collapses/stagnates before this day even comes. As predicted every year for the past 15 years.
genman 3y ago
And from where does this isolation come from? I think you are contradicting a little with yourself here.
- Matl 3y ago
  It comes from it attacking Taiwan unprovoked, but there's no need for large U.S. presence for that to already not be attractive as it would be a huge blow for China in the economic realm and even include the Global South. On the other hand, Taiwan declaring independence on U.S. encouragement for example could be spun by China as protecting its stated red lines and acting out despite U.S. presence in the region. You may not know this, but Russia enjoys some sympathy in the Global South because they see the situation as being at least partly provoked by the U.S. The same could happen over Taiwan, but it doesn't have to if cooler heads prevail.
  - genman 3y ago
    Not from "what" but from "where" is the question. If there was no Western opposition to the attack, there wouldn't be no isolation. The fact that Russia has received some sympathy shows how important is to express the situation correctly - Russia was not provoked by anything. They would have attacked either way because they consider these lands theirs and the people who live there at best as nothing. The thinking goes - those countries they attack will greet them as liberators or they are the worst enemies that must be eliminated (e.g. Nazis). Now I can understand that some countries have strong anti-US sentiment, but reason for the whole war has a very little to do with US despite Russia's huge effort to make it appear to be the cause.

brabel 3y ago

No, you're misrepresenting it. Your rationale is that Russia is an evil empire trying to expand its borders to its former glory, and that's why it attacked Ukraine... a primary school level of simplification. You ignore that Russia's number one fear after the collapse of the USSR was for another military invasion from the West, as had happened several times over the last few centuries... that Russia's border with Ukraine is its most "porous" border, easy to cross for whatever purpose, including a military invasion... that NATO's whole purpose since it was founded has always been to counter Russia, so the Russian's fears that NATO is an enemy are absolutely correct... that Ukraine's Euromaidan revolution caused Ukraine to go from a neutral country (or a buffer country as most people call it) to being actively hostile against Russia, which was the trigger for the Crimean invasion in 2014... that the US and UK, as guarantors of the Budapest Agreement with Russian and Ukraine, should have immediately intervened to defend Ukraine when that happened, but did absolutely nothing, giving Russia confirmation that it would be able to keep Ukraine out of NATO by force, which is really what it is trying to do currently... and finally, that every country has its motivations to do the things it does, a lot more complex and subtle than "being evil and wanting more land", and perhaps trying to understand what those motivations are, why their culture has evolved the way it has and how it is likely to react to your actions, would go a very long way to avoiding stupid conflicts like this. But yeah, it's so much easier to keep parroting the news and thinking of the whole story as a black-and-white, villain VS hero story.

lisasays 3y ago
Your rationale is that Russia is an evil empire trying to expand its borders to its former glory, and that's why it attacked Ukraine... a primary school level of simplification. Disagree. Replace "evil empire" with "Old-school imperialist power" and you have a 90 percent approximation to the essential truth about that country (or its current leadership, in any case). For all its banality. Though "evil" of course is not a misplaced word to use either, in regard to its actions.
HellDunkel 3y ago
You could have made your point without accusing anyone of parroting „the media“. Russia has agreed to the borders of Ukraine in 1993 and from then on 2 more times. They have onesidedly broken the agreement and attacked a peaceful neighbour, no commitment to not joining NATO has been granted. These are facts you can easily look up, no need to come up with made up security concerns which have been no problem a decade earlier.